Undocumented Chico man passed the bar, but can he practice law?

FYI,

Undocumented Chico man passed the bar, but can he practice law? - latimes.com


Abner

 

Not that I am against anyone or group but this makes me think "If the decision doesn't go well, it could be one more ceiling that an undocumented student will hit at some point," she said. - shouldn't there be a ceiling...they are here illegally?

 

No way in hell.

 

I would think that he would have to do a few things that require citizenship before he could set up a practice. He would have to file a DBA which would require ID. He would have to interface with the courts. I would imagine that his illegal alien status would become evident rather quickly because of this and several other factors.

 

I had something similar happen when I was working for a university. We had a nursing student that was undocumented/illegal in our program. Everything was going well, until she had to do a clinical rotation in her senior year at the county hospital. They required proof of legal residency status, which she didn't have. It wound up getting settled after a congressman got involved. IIRC, we had a few others after her with the same issue, but by then the university knew how to handle it.

 

Strange, here is a story where the Ku Klux Klan wants to Adopt-A-Highway in Georgia, which I am assume is legal (regardless about how you feel about what they stand for) and people are up in arms and do not want it to happen. Here is something that is illegal where an undocumented person finished law school and people are up in arms and want to turn a blind eye. What ever happened to just following the law...remember those scales with the blindfolded person?

 

I agree Randell. The KKK is disgusting but their speech is protected and their members are probably legal.
Lets stop calling illegal aliens undocumented workers. They are illegal aliens. Thats it.

 

I think the difference is that certain people feel that American immigration law is unjust. If following the rule of law isn't just, it is a citizen's right to advocate a change in that law. Some take that even further to civil disobedience.

Peace,
db

 

For those that have an issue with illegal immigrants. What is your issue? The fact that they simply aren't following the law or fairness and equality for others trying to come and waiting for the process? Don't want any immigrants at all? Have an issue with a welfare state and think that they are a draw on the economy?

How about the fact that the immigration policy isn't applied equally depending on your country of origin (Cuba/Mexico)? Does the law trump all? *Strawman here: Was owning slaves (denying equality) fine because the government sanctioned it?

If you were somewhere that your basic needs aren't being met, would you stay there simply because you were told you couldn't seek a better life for your family? Would you wait 5-10 years to be told no and then make a different decision from there?


Regardless, here is a person searching for a better life, doing better than most people that won the location lottery, and plans to contribute back to society. Why should we kick this person out?

An "us vs. them" mentality is at play I think. We are legal, they are illegal. We are right, they are wrong. We should win, they should lose. They deserve...... whatever they get.

 

I may not agree with all of what JB said but he does have a point. The U.S. immigration policy isn't applied equally...that's fact. Personally do I think that it's unequal application justifies breaking that law...well that's a tough one. Illegal immigration is a huge issue an America. Some of them cross the border of America an do horrible crimes. Some like this individual accomplish positive things.

Warning, random tangent coming...One main issue I have is the "sense of entitlement". A lot Americans have this "I'm American so I deserve X,Y,Z". I have been to over 25+ countries. One thing that I have seen is that as Americans we are often out worked.

 

As a country built on immigration I am all for immigration. I don't mind anyone coming to this country if they are going to contribute. BUT ... we have a right to control who we allow in and to be as selective as we want. After all it is our country. We also have a right to expect our rules followed. One thing that pisses me off is cheaters, people that cut in lines, etc.

Also, I understand a parent wanting a better life and bringing their children to the US. I'd do it myself. But don't blame Americans (or whine or cry) when that kid gets older and has a hard time or gets deported, etc. It is a consequence of the parents bringing the kids over. There are risks and rewards of the parents' decision. It is not the fault of Americans so don't blame us.

The term undocumented is offensive to me. This insinuates they were legal at some point and just lost their documents. There was/is no documents to be undocumented. They are illegals. If you can't acknowledge this you are blinded.

I don't think illegals should be given any entitlements (welfare, food stamps, social security, in-state tuition, etc). We can't pay for it now. They should not be able to get drivers licenses or other privileges reserved for citizens or people here legally.

I think there should be much more effort to protect the borders before there is any thought to citizenship for illegals. I do think there has to be a path to citizenship to those who are currently here AND who are contributing to society. Illegals that are welfare mommies should get the boot! The same illegal criminals (<- funny!).

I guess I ended up doing a rant.

 

I really have a hard time with an illegal immigrant being able to practice law. I mean come on this is absolutely crazy, he is here illegally and wants to represent others before our courts? Sorry he needs to do the first thing that is be ethical and return to his country of citizenship and apply to legally become a citizen.

 

I draw a distinction between those who came as adults and those who came as children.

The man in the article was brought to the US when he was under 2 years old. I don't see why, as an adult, he should be punished for the actions of his parents.

I also recognize that we don't want to create incentives for illegal immigration, so there is definitely a tension here.

 

Not so fast. The article states Garcia was brought to the U.S. as an infant, stayed until he was 9, and then returned to Mexico. He then reentered the U.S. (unlawfully, but the exact manner is not specified) at age 17 and enrolled in HS. So, while still young, we can't fairly say he was "brought here by his parents" when at 17 (and by all accounts a smart person) he would have been aware that he was entering unlawfully.

 

Perhaps not, but how can a 17 year old (still a minor, mind you) be expected to remain in Mexico against his parents' wishes?

 

Well, my wife had a similar situation: parents moving to Mexico + wanted her to come. She refused, stayed in the U.S. and enrolled in college. Amazingly, she survived! Surely our friend from the article could have made it work, no? I don't begrudge him success. In fact, a new immigration policy going into effect soon might give him a path to a green card once his visa becomes available. So there may be a resolution for him soon enough. Good luck to him.

 

Why should Americans be punished for the acts of his parents?

 

And how exactly are we being punished? We aren't talking about some drug dealer here. He's a law school graduate.

 

I think he should be allowed to practice. He's 35 years old and has been here since he was 17 MONTHS old. He's as American as I am. I don't think he should be punished for the sins of his parents who brought him here. There should be some kind of streamlined residency or citizenship process for the children - minor or now adult - of illegal immigrants, who are illegal through no fault of their own. I'm sure if there had been a way for him to legalize himself - without being deported and applying from outside the U.S. with no promise of residency being granted - when he became an adult, he would have taken it.

 

That's 17 years old, not months, according to the article. So, while a sympathetic figure to an extent, he's not really here through "no fault of his own" like many younger children. Rather the opposite.